|
|
No. 36: Implementing Encoded Archival Description 28 July - 1 August 1997 |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: The pre-course readings were extremely helpful, but there was a glitch between the RBS Director and the instructor, each thinking the other had sent the list to the students. Hence, we didn't get them until a little over a week before class with little time to gather and read them. 2: Very useful. 3: Pre-course readings were somewhat helpful. The less technical but more conceptual articles (such as DeRose's) were more useful. Some of the very technical EAD and DTD readings were hard to process without having had some practical experience. 4: Very relevant. List arrived in a timely manner. 5: Very. They provided an essential introduction to the topic. 6: Not necessary. 7: They were useful, but have more value now, after a full week of learning about EAD. 8: Excellent. 9: Minimal, but useful. 10: Fairly useful. |
|
2. Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: The syllabus is appropriate and useful and will be the "Bible" when I get back to work. 2: Very useful; I'd like to get a copy of the DTD itself in paper form. 3: Yes, the packet we received was very useful. Instructor has already agreed to supplement some items we felt were missing. 4: Yes. 5: Yes. Essential both to the course and implementation at home. 6: Useful, needed more. 7: Handout booklet was excellent as a tool to use as reference for the course. It will also be of great use as a guideline back at my home institution. 8: Yes. 9: Very good course materials I know I will refer back to them and share them with colleagues. 10: Yes. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: The students were pretty much on the same level of experience with SGML/EAD, but at varying levels of experience with Windows 95. The first two days we floundered a bit overwhelmed by the information, but by the last two days of working on our own finding aids, the information became clearer. 2: Quite good. 3: Yes. 5: Yes, challenging. 6: Yes. 7: I feel that everyone started with a different level of expertise in using Windows 95 and DOS commands. We needed a small tutorial on Windows 95 for everyone. 8: Perfectly tuned. 9-10: Yes. |
|
4. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description (ECD)? Did the course in general meet your expectations?
1-2: Yes. 3: Yes, the course corresponded very well to its RBS brochure description and very much met my expectations. 4: Overall, the course met my expectation, which was to give me a working/practical knowledge of EAD encoding. 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes. The course fulfilled my expectations of what I wanted to learn. 8: Yes. 9: Yes, although there are a few things the instructor could do to improve the content: 1) be better prepared with the hardware and software; have files loaded/copied/available; have procedure planned in detail. 2) Stay on task; leave discussions of esoteric points for coffee breaks; remember that the course description promises practical, hands-on experience. 10: Yes. |
|
5. What did you like best about the course?
1: Encoding our own finding aids. 2: 1) The level of expertise of the instructor. 2) The down-to-earth, easily approachable nature of the instructor (ability to translate techie into non-techie). 3: Question and answer sessions were very helpful. Actually encoding our own finding aids was extremely useful. 4: Hands-on work. I needed to know how the encoding worked in a practical way, and I was able to take away this experience. It also gave me an excellent feel for the difficulties of encoding existing finding guides. 5: Tailoring of group discussion to specific needs of participants i.e., course content was not rigid. 6: The attitude of the instructor open, friendly, encouraging, enthusiastic, and dedicated. 7: Hands-on work with my own finding aid. Overview of tools available and where EAD is heading. 8: The content. 9: Hands-on experience authoring, editing, parsing, publishing our finding aids. 10: The hands-on nature and informal structure. Willingness of the instructor to work on an individual's questions on a one-to-one basis. |
|
6. How could the course have been improved?
1: More organized structure the first day. 2: 1) Start tagging a bit earlier. 2) Expand discussion of the future/conversion/publishing/technical support, etc. 3) More software reviews. 4) Access to our work/computers after 5pm. 3: Occasionally the order of what we learned seemed a little illogical. Sometimes we wasted a bit too much time, and occasionally were interrupted at the wrong time for an explanation that referred to something else. 4: I would either require Windows 95 training as a prerequisite or leave a one-to-two hour component to begin with to make everyone speedier at copying files. 5: If all things were possible, an assistant would solve individual routine computer hang-ups while the instructor concentrated on content. 6: Suggest that students should (if possible) have some familiarity with Windows 95. Too much time was wasted teaching students how to move files, copy them, etc. There should be drills on tagging that are corrected, so that students can leave more confident in their abilities in this major area. 7: Attempt to show us rather than tell us how to use a method to mark-up word-processed finding aids. 8: No suggestions. 9: See no.5, above. |
|
7. Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class, e.g. Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner and videos, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.
1: Sunday dinner was tasty, got to meet new people. Bookseller Night gave free transportation downtown to spend money and eat. 2: Sunday night dinner: good. Videos: mildly amusing. Lectures: fair. Exhibition: excellent. 3: Missed the Sunday afternoon tour, dinner, and videos. Lectures I attended were somewhat interesting, although both were a little dry. Bookseller Night was fun. 4: All of the outside activities were good. Possibly a more dynamic speaker about technology would be nice. 5: Sunday dinner was a nice introduction to the week. Bookseller Night was greatly appreciated. Lectures are a nice punctuation for a day, but could be reduced to relieve stress on the staff. 8: Fine. 9: Very enjoyable lectures. I liked the opportunity to get downtown to the bookstores. |
|
8. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?
1: Read the handouts at night, read the bibliography before coming. I certainly got my money's worth. 2: Absolutely. This course was a great resource for myself and my institution. I plan to report back that it was a great success. Outstanding! Many thanks. 3: Yes, definitely got my money's worth! Wide range of experience in the class, but that's probably unavoidable. 4: The course taught me how complicated the issues of EAD are, both from an encoding perspective and the perspective of the tools needed to publish. Happily, by the end of the week I was conversant enough to know what was going on and the different issues involved. 5: Well worth the money. 7: Come with a thorough knowledge of Windows 95 and basic DOS tools. 8: Yes. |
| Number of respondents: 10 |
|
| There were ten students: nine archivist/manuscript librarians (90%) and one general librarian with some rare book duties (10%). |